it may, or may not have been the OP's intent, but this thread is destined to be another Vettel bash complete with un-supported rumors and "facts".

Blake, it really wasn't my intent...

"Now this isn't a topic on if Vettel credentials as WDC or if he is a great driver or not (I'm not a big fan but I still think the guy's quality) but it's more focused on his potential fear of having a fast teammate."

Other posters turned it into bashing but that clearly wasn't my intent. I started the topic by referencing a Danny Ric quote, Martin Brundle commentary and Lewis Hamilton's previous stance.

I wanted to open the floor on this, and ask for any knowledge or inside info.

The difference is that Vettel doesn't feel the need to comment on what he thinks other drivers prefer or don't prefer, while Hamilton does. People start to believe it and the urban myth is forming

Vettel doesn't need to say those things he just puts it in his contract.

Stating things you have absolutely no proof for in an authoritative tone may be enough to win the White House, but that doesn't make it acceptable for a civilized forum. Nobody has ever proved that Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates into subservient #2s - and indeed, 2014 would argue that he does not have that privilege - so why go around stating it as a fact?

The truth of the matter is that Hamilton has had just as many #2 drivers for teammates as Vettel has, but he's the one who talks a lot of tough talk about how he wants equal status. And if anything, he's quicker to get on the radio and ask to be let past. Need I remind you that between Hamilton and Vettel, only one of them has had a teammate ordered out of his way this season?

Yes indeed, some people perhaps need to invent reasons why their favourite driver is behind in the championship whilst driving the equal or even superior car?

The history of F1 shows that having no competition from your teammate is the best way to go about winning the WDC.

While true, it doesn't mean that he has a term in his contract. Have you seen it? If not, then please stop presenting it as a fact. You only undermine your own posts by doing that

The difference is that Vettel doesn't feel the need to comment on what he thinks other drivers prefer or don't prefer, while Hamilton does. People start to believe it and the urban myth is forming

Vettel doesn't need to say those things he just puts it in his contract.

Stating things you have absolutely no proof for in an authoritative tone may be enough to win the White House, but that doesn't make it acceptable for a civilized forum. Nobody has ever proved that Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates into subservient #2s - and indeed, 2014 would argue that he does not have that privilege - so why go around stating it as a fact?

The truth of the matter is that Hamilton has had just as many #2 drivers for teammates as Vettel has, but he's the one who talks a lot of tough talk about how he wants equal status. And if anything, he's quicker to get on the radio and ask to be let past. Need I remind you that between Hamilton and Vettel, only one of them has had a teammate ordered out of his way this season?

Wow I'm not being civilised whilst you ascertain that Kimi has never helped Vettel this season, you obviously have not heard what some F1 pundits have to say about Kimi, one of them not British but he's from a former British colony so that probably classes him as being biased.

I think in all fairness there's a difference between saying no-one has ever proven Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates subservient #2s, and saying Kimi has never helped Vettel this season. We know that Kimi helped with the tow at Spa, for example, but that doesn't make it contractual.

I would agree that Ferrari have appeared to favour Vettel in strategy this season, but as pointed out Lewis has enjoyed orders himself, so it's not true to paint him as at some kind of disadvantage. Besides which, only once this season, in Hungary, has Lewis ever finished a race directly behind Bottas. In other words, Bottas has never impeded Hamilton in a race, aside from Hungary, where Lewis was given the opportunity to get ahead. I don't recall Kimi ever being asked to stand aside?

The truth is that Vettel has shown himself to be markedly superior to Kimi this season (well, in their entire time together, actually). It's very easy to claim Kimi's in a supporting role, but that looks largely to be down to his driving, not any team orders.

It's been obvious for years that even if there have been no explicit team orders Ferrari have consistently given Kimi a no.2's race strategy so just by sheer neglect there has been team preference for a driver. His strategy has always been a rushed afterthought after Vettel's has been taken care of and Kimi had a fairer shake against Alonso but at that time the team wanted to temper Alonso's ego as his contract was up for renewal.

Vettel doesn't need to say those things he just puts it in his contract.

Stating things you have absolutely no proof for in an authoritative tone may be enough to win the White House, but that doesn't make it acceptable for a civilized forum. Nobody has ever proved that Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates into subservient #2s - and indeed, 2014 would argue that he does not have that privilege - so why go around stating it as a fact?

The truth of the matter is that Hamilton has had just as many #2 drivers for teammates as Vettel has, but he's the one who talks a lot of tough talk about how he wants equal status. And if anything, he's quicker to get on the radio and ask to be let past. Need I remind you that between Hamilton and Vettel, only one of them has had a teammate ordered out of his way this season?

Yes indeed, some people perhaps need to invent reasons why their favourite driver is behind in the championship whilst driving the equal or even superior car?

The history of F1 shows that having no competition from your teammate is the best way to go about winning the WDC.

While true, it doesn't mean that he has a term in his contract. Have you seen it? If not, then please stop presenting it as a fact. You only undermine your own posts by doing that

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

The difference is that Vettel doesn't feel the need to comment on what he thinks other drivers prefer or don't prefer, while Hamilton does. People start to believe it and the urban myth is forming

Vettel doesn't need to say those things he just puts it in his contract.

Stating things you have absolutely no proof for in an authoritative tone may be enough to win the White House, but that doesn't make it acceptable for a civilized forum. Nobody has ever proved that Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates into subservient #2s - and indeed, 2014 would argue that he does not have that privilege - so why go around stating it as a fact?

The truth of the matter is that Hamilton has had just as many #2 drivers for teammates as Vettel has, but he's the one who talks a lot of tough talk about how he wants equal status. And if anything, he's quicker to get on the radio and ask to be let past. Need I remind you that between Hamilton and Vettel, only one of them has had a teammate ordered out of his way this season?

Wow I'm not being civilised whilst you ascertain that Kimi has never helped Vettel this season, you obviously have not heard what some F1 pundits have to say about Kimi, one of them not British but he's from a former British colony so that probably classes him as being biased.

I think in all fairness there's a difference between saying no-one has ever proven Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates subservient #2s, and saying Kimi has never helped Vettel this season. We know that Kimi helped with the tow at Spa, for example, but that doesn't make it contractual.

I would agree that Ferrari have appeared to favour Vettel in strategy this season, but as pointed out Lewis has enjoyed orders himself, so it's not true to paint him as at some kind of disadvantage. Besides which, only once this season, in Hungary, has Lewis ever finished a race directly behind Bottas. In other words, Bottas has never impeded Hamilton in a race, aside from Hungary, where Lewis was given the opportunity to get ahead. I don't recall Kimi ever being asked to stand aside?

The truth is that Vettel has shown himself to be markedly superior to Kimi this season (well, in their entire time together, actually). It's very easy to claim Kimi's in a supporting role, but that looks largely to be down to his driving, not any team orders.

Indeed but even with Kimi's poor driving he's been given another contract so what does that say?

Vettel doesn't need to say those things he just puts it in his contract.

Stating things you have absolutely no proof for in an authoritative tone may be enough to win the White House, but that doesn't make it acceptable for a civilized forum. Nobody has ever proved that Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates into subservient #2s - and indeed, 2014 would argue that he does not have that privilege - so why go around stating it as a fact?

The truth of the matter is that Hamilton has had just as many #2 drivers for teammates as Vettel has, but he's the one who talks a lot of tough talk about how he wants equal status. And if anything, he's quicker to get on the radio and ask to be let past. Need I remind you that between Hamilton and Vettel, only one of them has had a teammate ordered out of his way this season?

Wow I'm not being civilised whilst you ascertain that Kimi has never helped Vettel this season, you obviously have not heard what some F1 pundits have to say about Kimi, one of them not British but he's from a former British colony so that probably classes him as being biased.

I think in all fairness there's a difference between saying no-one has ever proven Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates subservient #2s, and saying Kimi has never helped Vettel this season. We know that Kimi helped with the tow at Spa, for example, but that doesn't make it contractual.

I would agree that Ferrari have appeared to favour Vettel in strategy this season, but as pointed out Lewis has enjoyed orders himself, so it's not true to paint him as at some kind of disadvantage. Besides which, only once this season, in Hungary, has Lewis ever finished a race directly behind Bottas. In other words, Bottas has never impeded Hamilton in a race, aside from Hungary, where Lewis was given the opportunity to get ahead. I don't recall Kimi ever being asked to stand aside?

The truth is that Vettel has shown himself to be markedly superior to Kimi this season (well, in their entire time together, actually). It's very easy to claim Kimi's in a supporting role, but that looks largely to be down to his driving, not any team orders.

Indeed but even with Kimi's poor driving he's been given another contract so what does that say?

I'm not convinced he deserves another contract, tbh, but it might suggest a number of things, or a combination thereof. It could be, for example, that they don't want two roosters in the hen house, as an ex-Ferrari employee once famously said. It could be that they want to give themselves some more options at the end of 2018, when a number of drivers will be out of contract. It could be that they think no-one around and available at this point in time is a worthwhile upgrade. What it doesn't necessarily mean is that Vettel has any part of it written into his contract

Stating things you have absolutely no proof for in an authoritative tone may be enough to win the White House, but that doesn't make it acceptable for a civilized forum. Nobody has ever proved that Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates into subservient #2s - and indeed, 2014 would argue that he does not have that privilege - so why go around stating it as a fact?

The truth of the matter is that Hamilton has had just as many #2 drivers for teammates as Vettel has, but he's the one who talks a lot of tough talk about how he wants equal status. And if anything, he's quicker to get on the radio and ask to be let past. Need I remind you that between Hamilton and Vettel, only one of them has had a teammate ordered out of his way this season?

Yes indeed, some people perhaps need to invent reasons why their favourite driver is behind in the championship whilst driving the equal or even superior car?

The history of F1 shows that having no competition from your teammate is the best way to go about winning the WDC.

While true, it doesn't mean that he has a term in his contract. Have you seen it? If not, then please stop presenting it as a fact. You only undermine your own posts by doing that

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

The probability is that Brundle hasn't seen Vettel's brand new contract, neither we. It is all speculation; and while we can't just dismiss it (far stranger things have happened in F1), we can't just accept it as a fact either. It's just hearsay at the moment. And as you talked about history, remember that people were saying that Rubens had a No2 term in his contract as well, something that himself has denied.

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

No, it's just someone else making it up and enough people are repeating it, so it's becoming a "truth" accepted by a lot of people without any real basis for it.

I don't think we can disregard many people close to F1 repeating it as "without basis". We are never going to see his contract. Most likely, they are never going to see his contract either.

If his contract stipulates a veto on the other driver, then all we're ever going to get is hearsay from people close to F1. Those who have seen the contract will never speak publicly, and those who speak publicly will never see the contract. The guy who sees the contract will tell the guy who speaks publicly, and let him speak publicly.

Stating things you have absolutely no proof for in an authoritative tone may be enough to win the White House, but that doesn't make it acceptable for a civilized forum. Nobody has ever proved that Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates into subservient #2s - and indeed, 2014 would argue that he does not have that privilege - so why go around stating it as a fact?

The truth of the matter is that Hamilton has had just as many #2 drivers for teammates as Vettel has, but he's the one who talks a lot of tough talk about how he wants equal status. And if anything, he's quicker to get on the radio and ask to be let past. Need I remind you that between Hamilton and Vettel, only one of them has had a teammate ordered out of his way this season?

Wow I'm not being civilised whilst you ascertain that Kimi has never helped Vettel this season, you obviously have not heard what some F1 pundits have to say about Kimi, one of them not British but he's from a former British colony so that probably classes him as being biased.

I think in all fairness there's a difference between saying no-one has ever proven Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates subservient #2s, and saying Kimi has never helped Vettel this season. We know that Kimi helped with the tow at Spa, for example, but that doesn't make it contractual.

I would agree that Ferrari have appeared to favour Vettel in strategy this season, but as pointed out Lewis has enjoyed orders himself, so it's not true to paint him as at some kind of disadvantage. Besides which, only once this season, in Hungary, has Lewis ever finished a race directly behind Bottas. In other words, Bottas has never impeded Hamilton in a race, aside from Hungary, where Lewis was given the opportunity to get ahead. I don't recall Kimi ever being asked to stand aside?

The truth is that Vettel has shown himself to be markedly superior to Kimi this season (well, in their entire time together, actually). It's very easy to claim Kimi's in a supporting role, but that looks largely to be down to his driving, not any team orders.

Indeed but even with Kimi's poor driving he's been given another contract so what does that say?

I'm not convinced he deserves another contract, tbh, but it might suggest a number of things, or a combination thereof. It could be, for example, that they don't want two roosters in the hen house, as an ex-Ferrari employee once famously said. It could be that they want to give themselves some more options at the end of 2018, when a number of drivers will be out of contract. It could be that they think no-one around and available at this point in time is a worthwhile upgrade. What it doesn't necessarily mean is that Vettel has any part of it written into his contract

Well one things is for sure you don't know and I don't know but when you have several rumours that come from the paddock that's something to take note of, but of course certain things can be easily rubbished especially if you don't like what's being said.

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

No, it's just someone else making it up and enough people are repeating it, so it's becoming a "truth" accepted by a lot of people without any real basis for it.

I don't think we can disregard many people close to F1 repeating it as "without basis". We are never going to see his contract. Most likely, they are never going to see his contract either.

If his contract stipulates a veto on the other driver, then all we're ever going to get is hearsay from people close to F1. Those who have seen the contract will never speak publicly, and those who speak publicly will never see the contract. The guy who sees the contract will tell the guy who speaks publicly, and let him speak publicly.

For some reason I highly doubt:1. that a lot of people even at Ferrari have seen the contract (and those that have, are the highest-ups and Vettel)2. that one of those higher-ups, or Vettel, would tell journalists or external drivers what is in the contract

We can be quite certain that he never was a contractual #1 at RBR. Multi21 was good proof of that, and the TO's issued against him in 2014 and the overal equal treatment Ricciardo and Vettel received as well.

There's nothing to say he has it at Ferrari, but for (if I'm not mistaken) Hamilton saying it a few times and a host of people following suit.

Well one things is for sure you don't know and I don't know but when you have several rumours that come from the paddock that's something to take note of, but of course certain things can be easily rubbished especially if you don't like what's being said.

And of course certain rumours can be easily taken at face value especially if you like what's being said?

Indeed but even with Kimi's poor driving he's been given another contract so what does that say?

Why don't you tell us, poker. After all, it is you who have practically claimed to know what is in Vettel's contract and appear to think you are a pit road insider allowing you to post rumors as though they are proven facts.

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

No, it's just someone else making it up and enough people are repeating it, so it's becoming a "truth" accepted by a lot of people without any real basis for it.

I don't think we can disregard many people close to F1 repeating it as "without basis". We are never going to see his contract. Most likely, they are never going to see his contract either.

If his contract stipulates a veto on the other driver, then all we're ever going to get is hearsay from people close to F1. Those who have seen the contract will never speak publicly, and those who speak publicly will never see the contract. The guy who sees the contract will tell the guy who speaks publicly, and let him speak publicly.

For some reason I highly doubt:1. that a lot of people even at Ferrari have seen the contract (and those that have, are the highest-ups and Vettel)2. that one of those higher-ups, or Vettel, would tell journalists or external drivers what is in the contract

We can be quite certain that he never was a contractual #1 at RBR. Multi21 was good proof of that, and the TO's issued against him in 2014 and the overal equal treatment Ricciardo and Vettel received as well.

There's nothing to say he has it at Ferrari, but for (if I'm not mistaken) Hamilton saying it a few times and a host of people following suit.

Define contractual #1

I think it becomes quite difficult to write a contract stating "I will always get track position, I will always get preferential strategy" because there are times where this simply isn't practical from a team perspective. They could damage things overall trying to benefit Vettel with no pay-off.

It's not so difficult to believe that he has a veto on the 2nd driver (its also not difficult to believe that Alonso or Hamilton would do the same). Even beyond the contractual stuff, there is also the "just keep our favourite driver happy" element to it all.

I find it more suspicious that Toto and Lewis keeps talking about Vettels contract, makes me more suspicious that they are trying to cover up what Lewis has in his..Comes out more of a "if I'm beaten this year again even if I have the fastest car and a #2 teammate it wont look good, better put the light somewhere else.."

i dont know why people make a big deal about these things, every sportsman is selfish and has to be, particularly in an individual spot. vettel like anyone else in an advantageous position would do everything to load the dice in his favour. as any of you would. why would you put you reputation in jeopardy if you could avoid it?

schumacher did it with team mates, and even senna vetoed derrick warrick from being lotus team mate in 85 citing the team couldn't afford two top drivers. really? more like at that point in his career if senna lost to warrick then his stock falls dramatically in the eyes of other teams and warricks goes up. why did he do it? because his is a selfish sportsman. he wants to win the drivers championship, even at the expense of the team because what do people generally remember from season to season, the drivers champion, not the team.

its perfectly normal to take every advantage you can and anyone here who says they wouldn't is talking nonsense.

so why the surprise and why does anyone really care? so what if vettel wants an easier team mate if he can get one. when losing to anyone else would effect his stock and power within the paddock and reputation in eyes of other teams when they have a direct comparison between him and driver x, y or z?

i dont know why people make a big deal about these things, every sportsman is selfish and has to be, particularly in an individual spot. vettel like anyone else in an advantageous position would do everything to load the dice in his favour. as any of you would. why would you put you reputation in jeopardy if you could avoid it?

schumacher did it with team mates, and even senna vetoed derrick warrick from being lotus team mate in 85 citing the team couldn't afford two top drivers. really? more like at that point in his career if senna lost to warrick then his stock falls dramatically in the eyes of other teams and warricks goes up. why did he do it? because his is a selfish sportsman. he wants to win the drivers championship, even at the expense of the team because what do people generally remember from season to season, the drivers champion, not the team.

its perfectly normal to take every advantage you can and anyone here who says they wouldn't is talking nonsense.

so why the surprise and why does anyone really care? so what if vettel wants an easier team mate if he can get one. when losing to anyone else would effect his stock and power within the paddock and reputation in eyes of other teams when they have a direct comparison between him and driver x, y or z?

I'm with you on this. Different drivers have been accused of varying degrees of politics. Who cares? In any walk of life some people are better at networking, some are better at maneuvering things to their advantage..

I don't get why this is used as an attack on Vettel, and I don't get why people feel so strongly a need to defend him for something which isn't really wrong.

Yes indeed, some people perhaps need to invent reasons why their favourite driver is behind in the championship whilst driving the equal or even superior car?

The history of F1 shows that having no competition from your teammate is the best way to go about winning the WDC.

While true, it doesn't mean that he has a term in his contract. Have you seen it? If not, then please stop presenting it as a fact. You only undermine your own posts by doing that

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

The probability is that Brundle hasn't seen Vettel's brand new contract, neither we. It is all speculation; and while we can't just dismiss it (far stranger things have happened in F1), we can't just accept it as a fact either. It's just hearsay at the moment. And as you talked about history, remember that people were saying that Rubens had a No2 term in his contract as well, something that himself has denied.

If Rubens didn't why did he allow himself to be treated in such a way and let's not forget that he left the team, he wasn't sacked, and why was he so salty to Schumacher in later years, it all spoke of a driver that wasn't that happy.

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

No, it's just someone else making it up and enough people are repeating it, so it's becoming a "truth" accepted by a lot of people without any real basis for it.

I don't think we can disregard many people close to F1 repeating it as "without basis". We are never going to see his contract. Most likely, they are never going to see his contract either.

If his contract stipulates a veto on the other driver, then all we're ever going to get is hearsay from people close to F1. Those who have seen the contract will never speak publicly, and those who speak publicly will never see the contract. The guy who sees the contract will tell the guy who speaks publicly, and let him speak publicly.

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

No, it's just someone else making it up and enough people are repeating it, so it's becoming a "truth" accepted by a lot of people without any real basis for it.

I don't think we can disregard many people close to F1 repeating it as "without basis". We are never going to see his contract. Most likely, they are never going to see his contract either.

If his contract stipulates a veto on the other driver, then all we're ever going to get is hearsay from people close to F1. Those who have seen the contract will never speak publicly, and those who speak publicly will never see the contract. The guy who sees the contract will tell the guy who speaks publicly, and let him speak publicly.

For some reason I highly doubt:1. that a lot of people even at Ferrari have seen the contract (and those that have, are the highest-ups and Vettel)2. that one of those higher-ups, or Vettel, would tell journalists or external drivers what is in the contract

We can be quite certain that he never was a contractual #1 at RBR. Multi21 was good proof of that, and the TO's issued against him in 2014 and the overal equal treatment Ricciardo and Vettel received as well.

There's nothing to say he has it at Ferrari, but for (if I'm not mistaken) Hamilton saying it a few times and a host of people following suit.

Wow I'm not being civilised whilst you ascertain that Kimi has never helped Vettel this season, you obviously have not heard what some F1 pundits have to say about Kimi, one of them not British but he's from a former British colony so that probably classes him as being biased.

I think in all fairness there's a difference between saying no-one has ever proven Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates subservient #2s, and saying Kimi has never helped Vettel this season. We know that Kimi helped with the tow at Spa, for example, but that doesn't make it contractual.

I would agree that Ferrari have appeared to favour Vettel in strategy this season, but as pointed out Lewis has enjoyed orders himself, so it's not true to paint him as at some kind of disadvantage. Besides which, only once this season, in Hungary, has Lewis ever finished a race directly behind Bottas. In other words, Bottas has never impeded Hamilton in a race, aside from Hungary, where Lewis was given the opportunity to get ahead. I don't recall Kimi ever being asked to stand aside?

The truth is that Vettel has shown himself to be markedly superior to Kimi this season (well, in their entire time together, actually). It's very easy to claim Kimi's in a supporting role, but that looks largely to be down to his driving, not any team orders.

Indeed but even with Kimi's poor driving he's been given another contract so what does that say?

I'm not convinced he deserves another contract, tbh, but it might suggest a number of things, or a combination thereof. It could be, for example, that they don't want two roosters in the hen house, as an ex-Ferrari employee once famously said. It could be that they want to give themselves some more options at the end of 2018, when a number of drivers will be out of contract. It could be that they think no-one around and available at this point in time is a worthwhile upgrade. What it doesn't necessarily mean is that Vettel has any part of it written into his contract

Well one things is for sure you don't know and I don't know but when you have several rumours that come from the paddock that's something to take note of, but of course certain things can be easily rubbished especially if you don't like what's being said.

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

No, it's just someone else making it up and enough people are repeating it, so it's becoming a "truth" accepted by a lot of people without any real basis for it.

I don't think we can disregard many people close to F1 repeating it as "without basis". We are never going to see his contract. Most likely, they are never going to see his contract either.

If his contract stipulates a veto on the other driver, then all we're ever going to get is hearsay from people close to F1. Those who have seen the contract will never speak publicly, and those who speak publicly will never see the contract. The guy who sees the contract will tell the guy who speaks publicly, and let him speak publicly.

For some reason I highly doubt:1. that a lot of people even at Ferrari have seen the contract (and those that have, are the highest-ups and Vettel)2. that one of those higher-ups, or Vettel, would tell journalists or external drivers what is in the contract

We can be quite certain that he never was a contractual #1 at RBR. Multi21 was good proof of that, and the TO's issued against him in 2014 and the overal equal treatment Ricciardo and Vettel received as well.

There's nothing to say he has it at Ferrari, but for (if I'm not mistaken) Hamilton saying it a few times and a host of people following suit.

The history of F1 shows that having no competition from your teammate is the best way to go about winning the WDC.

While true, it doesn't mean that he has a term in his contract. Have you seen it? If not, then please stop presenting it as a fact. You only undermine your own posts by doing that

Both myself and the thread starter only bring this forward because of various rumours that eminate from the paddock, it's just not a simple case of trying to make things up.

The probability is that Brundle hasn't seen Vettel's brand new contract, neither we. It is all speculation; and while we can't just dismiss it (far stranger things have happened in F1), we can't just accept it as a fact either. It's just hearsay at the moment. And as you talked about history, remember that people were saying that Rubens had a No2 term in his contract as well, something that himself has denied.

If Rubens didn't why did he allow himself to be treated in such a way and let's not forget that he left the team, he wasn't sacked, and why was he so salty to Schumacher in later years, it all spoke of a driver that wasn't that happy.

You'd have to ask him. It is quite telling that you are not happy with the info from the horse's mouth, but are happy to accept any piece of info that comes from rumours around the paddock

- Vettel demands & gets a contractual No. 1 status- Vettel is a jerk who disobeys TOs when asked not to race his teammate ("multi" - Mark, "tough luck" - Ric)- Vettel obeys TOs when asked to let the faster teammate pass (Ric)- Vettel is a contractual No. 1 in Ferrari but got to actually race Kimi on track and pass him on merit (China '17)

Go figure. So much so for folks knowing what exactly is there in his contracts.

From the paddock it was said that Vettel's preferential status is in the pit stop strategies.

Yup, and from the paddock... "he just puts it in his contract".

As far as Ham, we don't need the paddock even. His boss Lauda, who still can't get over that Ham gave back those 3 points to Bottas, tells us all we needed to know?

Still you choose to ignore what Wolff said but then again he just works in the paddock and what does he know about how Ferrari are operating?

Wolff can say whatever he wants, but the truth we get from Lauda about Ham and Merc... oh, wait a moment... you chose to ignore that one? Ah well, never mind, good for you. We know what we needed to know.(now back to you, tell us more about what the paddock tells you that Vettel "just puts it in his contract")

Well one things is for sure you don't know and I don't know but when you have several rumours that come from the paddock that's something to take note of, but of course certain things can be easily rubbished especially if you don't like what's being said.

And of course certain rumours can be easily taken at face value especially if you like what's being said?

Indeed but even with Kimi's poor driving he's been given another contract so what does that say?

Why don't you tell us, poker. After all, it is you who have practically claimed to know what is in Vettel's contract and appear to think you are a pit road insider allowing you to post rumors as though they are proven facts.

Me personally would be that they are happy to have a driver as compliant as Kimi and who also keeps Vettel happy.

I find it more suspicious that Toto and Lewis keeps talking about Vettels contract, makes me more suspicious that they are trying to cover up what Lewis has in his..Comes out more of a "if I'm beaten this year again even if I have the fastest car and a #2 teammate it wont look good, better put the light somewhere else.."

I think in all fairness there's a difference between saying no-one has ever proven Vettel has anything in his contract to make his teammates subservient #2s, and saying Kimi has never helped Vettel this season. We know that Kimi helped with the tow at Spa, for example, but that doesn't make it contractual.

I would agree that Ferrari have appeared to favour Vettel in strategy this season, but as pointed out Lewis has enjoyed orders himself, so it's not true to paint him as at some kind of disadvantage. Besides which, only once this season, in Hungary, has Lewis ever finished a race directly behind Bottas. In other words, Bottas has never impeded Hamilton in a race, aside from Hungary, where Lewis was given the opportunity to get ahead. I don't recall Kimi ever being asked to stand aside?

The truth is that Vettel has shown himself to be markedly superior to Kimi this season (well, in their entire time together, actually). It's very easy to claim Kimi's in a supporting role, but that looks largely to be down to his driving, not any team orders.

Indeed but even with Kimi's poor driving he's been given another contract so what does that say?

I'm not convinced he deserves another contract, tbh, but it might suggest a number of things, or a combination thereof. It could be, for example, that they don't want two roosters in the hen house, as an ex-Ferrari employee once famously said. It could be that they want to give themselves some more options at the end of 2018, when a number of drivers will be out of contract. It could be that they think no-one around and available at this point in time is a worthwhile upgrade. What it doesn't necessarily mean is that Vettel has any part of it written into his contract

Well one things is for sure you don't know and I don't know but when you have several rumours that come from the paddock that's something to take note of, but of course certain things can be easily rubbished especially if you don't like what's being said.

I find it more suspicious that Toto and Lewis keeps talking about Vettels contract, makes me more suspicious that they are trying to cover up what Lewis has in his..Comes out more of a "if I'm beaten this year again even if I have the fastest car and a #2 teammate it wont look good, better put the light somewhere else.."

Indeed but even with Kimi's poor driving he's been given another contract so what does that say?

I'm not convinced he deserves another contract, tbh, but it might suggest a number of things, or a combination thereof. It could be, for example, that they don't want two roosters in the hen house, as an ex-Ferrari employee once famously said. It could be that they want to give themselves some more options at the end of 2018, when a number of drivers will be out of contract. It could be that they think no-one around and available at this point in time is a worthwhile upgrade. What it doesn't necessarily mean is that Vettel has any part of it written into his contract

Well one things is for sure you don't know and I don't know but when you have several rumours that come from the paddock that's something to take note of, but of course certain things can be easily rubbished especially if you don't like what's being said.